Guilty of 114 charges

[Sheaf Saint]

53 minutes ago, OnceaSaintalwaysaSaint said:

"Man City CEO defiant over Premier League charges" reads the BBC website. You can see it now. The FA are going to completely bottle it. Chelsea put their hand up and said fair cop guv and got a slap on the wrists. Bad precedent. Man City are going to get a bigger slap (guessing add a nought to the fine of Chelsea's) but ultimately, based on the gravity of the charges, they should be made to start again in the National League North...and like us, given no right of appeal.

What's irritating about this whole saga is how the media are giving so much publicity to Man City's side. Our legal department evidently told our management to keep shtum. But we were one kid with an iPhone whereas these charges are the systemic and constant fiddling of the books for a serious material advantage. The FA wants to honour the integrity of the sport - then show everyone they mean it.

BBC news even wheeled out Joe Hart this morning to tell everyone what a wonderful, generous guy the City chairman is and that he's absolutely, definitely not corrupt at all; honest guv, cross my heart and all that. 

It was fucking sickening. 

[Challenger]

2 minutes ago, Sheaf Saint said:

BBC news even wheeled out Joe Hart this morning to tell everyone what a wonderful, generous guy the City chairman is and that he's absolutely, definitely not corrupt at all; honest guv, cross my heart and all that. 

It was fucking sickening. 

Also shows how completely inept SFC were in their handling of this from start to finish.

[Ekelund24]

On 26/09/2026 at 18:14, Wade Garrett said:

Their chairman thinks they can prove their innocence.  He doesn’t get it does he.  Surely there’s paper trails on all these charges.  Smart lawyers can’t change the rules.

Think he’s a bloke who has never had to accept the word no.  Hope he takes his state money and fucks off out of it.
 

The problem is that smart lawyers don't need to change the rules they just need to spot the inconsistencies within the current set of them. Finding 114 of them may prove challenging but £5-10k per hour will help find them.

[Football Special]

40 minutes ago, Sheaf Saint said:

BBC news even wheeled out Joe Hart this morning to tell everyone what a wonderful, generous guy the City chairman is and that he's absolutely, definitely not corrupt at all; honest guv, cross my heart and all that. 

It was fucking sickening. 

Top PR agency pulling some strings , like Henry Winter saying need to be careful punishment of City doesn't damage their women's team, makes you laugh but you know they are getting paid to say it 

[Teamsaint1]

9 minutes ago, Football Special said:

Top PR agency pulling some strings , like Henry Winter saying need to be careful punishment of City doesn't damage their women's team, makes you laugh but you know they are getting paid to say it 

You are kidding me. What a tosser. Like we didn't know.

[Holmes_and_Watson]

3 hours ago, Sheaf Saint said:

BBC news even wheeled out Joe Hart this morning to tell everyone what a wonderful, generous guy the City chairman is and that he's absolutely, definitely not corrupt at all; honest guv, cross my heart and all that. 

It was fucking sickening. 

It must have been Hart I caught a bit of last night. He was talking about "my truth", a phrase I hate on top of a club he'd give his all for because it was run by people he had the utmost trust in.

I think he's a regular on the thing I was listening to. So, in fairness, it would have been odd had he not appeared, and odd had he not been asked about it.

[trousers]

 

[Holmes_and_Watson]

Ex-Saints boss on the charges. A very laid back Pochettino mentions us, even if does focus a bit more on the restrictions at Spurs.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/articles/cmed7q89vp5no

 

[saintant]

32 minutes ago, trousers said:

 

Brilliant 🙂

[Sunglasses Ron]

Ooft, savage from the Premier League...

The independent Commission found that between Seasons 2009/10 and 2017/18:

- Manchester City arranged ‘sham’ contracts (which misrepresented the true agreement between the parties) with a number of its commercial partners, as well as relying on ‘sham’ agreements with others, to artificially inflate the club’s revenues and reduce its costs
 

- The club filed misstated accounts and concealed the true state of its finances from its auditors and football regulators
 

- Manchester City was significantly in breach of both the Premier League’s and UEFA’s spending limits
 

- During the Premier League’s investigation, Manchester City committed multiple breaches of its duties of co-operation and utmost good faith towards the League (three of the four alleged breaches were upheld)

“This disciplinary case, and this decision, are the most significant in Premier League history.

Edited 1 hour ago by Sunglasses Ron

[skintsaint]

https://www.premierleague.com/en/news/4727779/premier-league-statement-manchester-city-fc

[skintsaint]

No mucking around there, think Citeh are buggered.

[Sarnia Cherie]

9 minutes ago, Sunglasses Ron said:

Ooft, savage from the Premier League...

The independent Commission found that between Seasons 2009/10 and 2017/18:

- Manchester City arranged ‘sham’ contracts (which misrepresented the true agreement between the parties) with a number of its commercial partners, as well as relying on ‘sham’ agreements with others, to artificially inflate the club’s revenues and reduce its costs
 

- The club filed misstated accounts and concealed the true state of its finances from its auditors and football regulators
 

- Manchester City was significantly in breach of both the Premier League’s and UEFA’s spending limits
 

- During the Premier League’s investigation, Manchester City committed multiple breaches of its duties of co-operation and utmost good faith towards the League (three of the four alleged breaches were upheld)

“This disciplinary case, and this decision, are the most significant in Premier League history.

Is this the result from their appeal? If it is, then that was much quicker than I thought it would be and if not ,then City don't have a snowball's chance in Hell. 

[Sunglasses Ron]

1 minute ago, Sarnia Cherie said:

Is this the result from their appeal? If it is, then that was much quicker than I thought it would be and if not ,then City don't have a snowball's chance in Hell. 

No, they have a few days to appeal.

[sockeye]

20 minutes ago, Sunglasses Ron said:

Ooft, savage from the Premier League...

The independent Commission found that between Seasons 2009/10 and 2017/18:

- Manchester City arranged ‘sham’ contracts (which misrepresented the true agreement between the parties) with a number of its commercial partners, as well as relying on ‘sham’ agreements with others, to artificially inflate the club’s revenues and reduce its costs
 

- The club filed misstated accounts and concealed the true state of its finances from its auditors and football regulators
 

- Manchester City was significantly in breach of both the Premier League’s and UEFA’s spending limits
 

- During the Premier League’s investigation, Manchester City committed multiple breaches of its duties of co-operation and utmost good faith towards the League (three of the four alleged breaches were upheld)

“This disciplinary case, and this decision, are the most significant in Premier League history.

`what do Henry Winter and Dom Shaw think of this?

[Saint Scott]

 

[Saint86]

We won't be playing Man City for a very long time (if indeed ever) after this... £900M and criminal fraud alleged. Thats the end of them, swindon will look like a slap on the wrist.

[imadirtyurchin]

1 minute ago, Saint Scott said:

 

I guess thats true about the city fans - but also - they got to experience the high of those wins and trophies. them getting retrospectively taken away doesn't really matter - the memories of the days themselves are all that fans really care about I reckon. harsher on the teams fans that didnt win trophies due the financial doping - stoke in the 2011 FA Cup final loss to city for example - a win for them there would've been massive for them.

[do i not like fizzy pop]

Deleted

Edited 47 minutes ago by do i not like fizzy pop
Idiot didn't see already posted

[Sunglasses Ron]

10 minutes ago, sockeye said:

`what do Henry Winter and Dom Shaw think of this?

And, more importantly, what does Liam Gallagher have to say?

[Saint Pete]

23 minutes ago, skintsaint said:

https://www.premierleague.com/en/news/4727779/premier-league-statement-manchester-city-fc

On the face of it, they have to throw the book at them after what they have said there, you can't sweep £900m of artificial income and the advantage that has given them under the carpet surely! But let's see what the Premier League do next and what further legal hurdles City can put in their way.

This bit in the PL CEO's statement made me properly laugh though:-

“It is a key responsibility of the Premier League to ensure that the Rules, approved by the clubs themselves, are upheld to protect the integrity of the competition. It is paramount that the League remains competitive and fair for all clubs and for the fans. We take that role extremely seriously."

If that is their responsibility, they have utterly failed in it as they have allowed this situation to continue and completely ruin any notion of fairness and integrity in the competition for a decade! 

[egg]

The scale of this is staggering, using various schemes to artificially inflating and reducing costs by almost a billion pounds. 

[EssEffCee]

7 minutes ago, imadirtyurchin said:

I guess thats true about the city fans - but also - they got to experience the high of those wins and trophies. them getting retrospectively taken away doesn't really matter - the memories of the days themselves are all that fans really care about I reckon. harsher on the teams fans that didnt win trophies due the financial doping - stoke in the 2011 FA Cup final loss to city for example - a win for them there would've been massive for them.

If offered today I'd take having their last 15 years and then being booted down the leagues afterwards.

[Turkish]

1 minute ago, egg said:

The scale of this is staggering, using various schemes to artificially inflating and reducing costs by almost a billion pounds. 

What sort of stuff is there? I haven't really looked into it much but i did see the other day Mancini was paid a salary of 1m Euro as Man City manager and 4m a year for 4 days annual consultancy by the City Group.

[Osvaldorama]

£900million of fraud!!!!!

More than most clubs have spent on transfers in their history   
 

This is soooo bad. Literally ruined football for like a decade. Holy shit. 

Edited 39 minutes ago by Osvaldorama

[Harry_SFC]

4 minutes ago, egg said:

The scale of this is staggering, using various schemes to artificially inflating and reducing costs by almost a billion pounds. 

Having read the statement etc I can't see any way they aren't kicked down the leagues. You can debate how much impact our cheating had but you can't debate theirs, that's for sure. 

[Turkish]

6 minutes ago, EssEffCee said:

If offered today I'd take having their last 15 years and then being booted down the leagues afterwards.

Me too, much how the Skate dont care they cheated their way to an FA Cup, they cheated, won and got something out of it. Unlike us who didnt even manage to get a day out at wembley let alone win anything and our crime was absolutely embarrassing, 

Edited 36 minutes ago by Turkish

[Saint Pete]

4 minutes ago, Turkish said:

What sort of stuff is there? I haven't really looked into it much but i did see the other day Mancini was paid a salary of 1m Euro as Man City manager and 4m a year for 4 days annual consultancy by the City Group.

This is the main bit that probably explains the majority of the £900m quoted, "sponsorship" contracts that were basically a means of City's owners paying massive amounts of money into the club against the rules:-

"The independent Commission found that Manchester City arranged ‘sham’ commercial deals with a number of its sponsors during the period, which were part of a disguised funding scheme, whereby those companies were only required to pay a portion of the relevant sponsorship fees. The remainder was funded by Abu Dhabi United Group Investment & Development Ltd (ADUG), which owned the club. As part of the scheme, further ‘sham’ arrangements, funded by ADUG, were entered into to enable the club to record lower operating expenses than it actually incurred, as well as a ‘sham’ circular arrangement with Fordham, an entity that purchased the club’s players’ image rights, that was funded by ADUG."

[Thripp87]

I assume the delay in Tonda is now purely because they want to throw the book at him, but realise it will make the whole Man City thing look even worse?

[egg]

8 minutes ago, Osvaldorama said:

£900million of fraud!!!!!

More than most clubs have spent on transfers in their history   
 

This is soooo bad. Literally ruined football for like a decade. Holy shit. 

Yep. The impact is so wide. Literally every club they've played has an arguable claim against them. 

[bpsaint]

The fact that the Premier League have come out and mentioned that Man City actively tried to deceive them and wouldn’t comply with the investigation suggests they’re going to go after them as harsh as possible. Almost a billion pounds worth of financial doping, I can’t see how this doesn’t end horribly for Man City, even with their money and legal bods. 

[Osvaldorama]

There’s no punishment big enough. 
 

I checked with AI and a rough estimate of Southampton’s entire transfer spending is £850-950million. So although that’s a really rough ballpark figure, the magnitude of the crime is just insane. 

[saintant]

There is a very interesting film on Youtube entitled Britains Biggest Football Scandal? Basically it mainly deals with the way City weaseled their way out of a 2 year ban which would have meant no Champions League Football. People often cite CAS as a above board organisation but they are shown in a very bad light and some would say they helped City get the ban quashed. It's a good watch as long as you can put up with the frequent same ads every few minutes.

[Holmes_and_Watson]

37 minutes ago, Saint Scott said:

 

Deterrent will play a strong part in it.

Groups with 900m of money to conceal = very, very few.
People with smartphones who can badly hide behind trees = could be anyone.

Tonda's lifetime ban and Man City's indulgent chuckle with the word "rascals" used, is therefore fitting.

[S-Clarke]

Are the PL about to grow some balls? They've gave Everton and Forest sporting punshiments, for what is basically loose change at the bottom of the sofa in comparison with this.

I can't see how Man City recover really. They've artificially grown the club, which is exactly what FFP was there to stop - and they worked around the rules.

Apparently one of the 'artificial' deals was Halland, it was in fact a £250m transfer from Dortmund - but contracts and money was exchanged to make the fee look a lot less on the books.